Civil War History - The South & Western TheatersCheck this forum for all South and Western Theater Questions. Included are the Western, Pacific, Trans-Mississippi, & Lower Seaboard and Gulf Approach Theaters.
Regarding Forrest in general, and the weapons his troops carried, I got the following off Eric Wittenberg's blog. Eric has published quite a few books on cavalry operations and has developed a fairly good reputation:
[begin quote]
Nathan Bedford Forrest
October 6th, 2005
I am often asked for my opinion on the greatest cavalrymen of the American Civil War. Invariably, unless the person asking the question knows me well, they express surprise and asky why Nathan Bedford Forrest is not on that list. I wish I had a dollar for every time that I’ve been asked this question. I’d have a lot of dollar bills by now.
In my humble opinion, there is no place for Nathan Bedford Forrest on ANY list of great cavalrymen of the Civil War.
I know that’s not only controversial, but borders on sacrilege in a lot of quarters. However, there’s a good reason and sound logic underlying this opinion of mine. First, and foremost, Forrest was not a cavalryman in any traditional sense of the word. The historic role of cavalry was scouting, screening, and reconnaissance. With no formal military training, Forrest had absolutely no talent for these crucial roles, and did not perform them with any ability, the one notable exception being the Battle of Shiloh in April 1862. By example, when one thinks of Jeb Stuart, one thinks of his masterful intelligence gathering (which included three different rides around the Army of the Potomac), the magnificent job he did screening Robert E. Lee’s retreat from Gettysburg, and the way Lee described Stuart: “the eyes and ears of the army.” Or, consider what a weeping Lee said when he learned that Stuart was dead–”he never brought me a wrong piece of information.” In all my years studying the Civil War, I have never once heard such a description applied to Forrest.
Rather, Forrest was a commander of mounted infantry. His men carried infantry weapons and used infantry tactics. They used their horses primarily as transportation, using them to move from place to place, where they then fought dismounted. I will grant you that Forrest was an innovative tactician, and that some of his tactics closely resemble some modern armored tactics, but it’s important to evaluate Forrest in the context of his times, and not in comparison with modern doctrine, which has changed. Forrest simply had no talent for the traditional roles of cavalry.
Second, there’s the fact that effective cavalry work depends upon the cavalry commander working closely with the army commander, whereby the cavalry commander serves as the eyes and ears of the army. Armies rely on discipline. Discipline means that junior officers obey the lawful orders of their superiors. This is the only way that a chain of command can be maintained and anarchy avoided. That means that an insubordinate junior officer, no matter how talented, has no value to an army commander if that junior officer refuses to obey orders. What I’ve just described is Nathan Bedford Forrest. Forrest absolutely and categorically refused to serve under two army commanders–Bragg and Hood–and said to Hood, “If you were half a man, I would slap your jowls.” Never mind that Hood had lost one leg in combat, and had a permanently crippled arm due to another combat wound. This means that unless he was in independent command, Forrest was entirely useless to the army commander.
By the way, the same description applies to Phil Sheridan, who was unable to serve under George G. Meade, and never did again after the Battle of the Wilderness.
Finally, there’s the issue of just what did Forrest accomplish. Yes, he had a gaudy combat record, but it’s easy to do that when you’re persistently and consistently up against the second team. I can think of only one instance where Forrest really faced the first team–against Wilson at Selma at the tail end of the war–and when he did face the first team, he got thrashed, big time. I come to the conclusion that Forrest really wasn’t much more than John S. Mosby on a larger scale–a nuisance that sucked away some resources, but which, in the big scheme of things, didn’t really have any impact at all of the final outcome of any major campaign or of the war in his theater.
When I examine all of these issues, I come away with one conclusion: that there is no place for Forrest on a list of great cavalrymen of the Civil War. In fact, given my druthers, I would choose Wade Hampton over Forrest in a heartbeat. Hampton was every bit as hard a fighter–Hampton had a gaudy won-lost record against the best the Union had to offer, not the second team–who was the ultimate subordinate officer and who had a real gift for performing the traditional roles of cavalry. Perhaps that explains why Hampton was THE highest ranking cavalry officer of the war on the Confederate side, outranking even Forrest.
It was wise of you to provide it rather than agree with it. Otherwise, some would insist that you name a second. Or, perhaps, have you roasted slowly over a burning pile of U.S. flags.
The Forrest quote reads in full:
"When you are oppressed I will come to your relief. I will be wearing a white sheet with eye holes, and will probably burn down your house. But only if you attempt to vote. One more point, Ixnay on the political meetings in the future."
Matthew, when you spout prejudice you only damage your own credibility. Obviously you need to do your homework. In my class such uninformed remarks get an "F".
"When you are oppressed I will come to your relief. I will be wearing a white sheet with eye holes, and will probably burn down your house. But only if you attempt to vote. One more point, Ixnay on the political meetings in the future."
A sad example of ignorance. Cleary you have never done any research into Forrest and his role with the KKK. Forrest is misunderstood because of nonsense like this.
I really have to disagree with Wittenberg. I enjoy his books and think he is a great researcher, but he is just spouting off his opinion without any real fact to back him up. I think his distaste for Forrest stems from his Eastern Theater fix.
It was wise of you to provide it rather than agree with it. Otherwise, some would insist that you name a second. Or, perhaps, have you roasted slowly over a burning pile of U.S. flags.
Thanks for providing that.
Ole
No screening or recon, huh? Sorry, fellers, but you are wrong again. At the beginning of the Kentucky Campaign in 1862 Forrest was doing recon and screening. From Feb to Sept 1863 he was doing the same--ever heard of Brentwood, Thompsons Station, First engagement at Franklin, First engagement at Spring Hill, etc? Forrest was screening and doing recon on Bragg's left to protect the area from which Bragg drew his food following Murfreesboro (Stones River to you Yanks). In 1864 Forrest was in indepencent command (destroying the union supply base at Johnsonville, TN, on Nov. 4, 1864) but during Hoods Tennessee Campaign Forrest was again doing recon and screening. Forrest's command of the rear guard on the retreat of the AoT to Alabama after Nashville is one of the great examples of a cavalry commander in action.
I know you would like to make Forrest a commander of mounted infantry so his men could carry bayonets but the facts just won't let you. The source Cash quotes clearly has not paid attention to the history of Forrest's command or the general history of the war.
Forrest does not belong on a list of the "greatest" cavalry generals only because no one else can reach his level!
Dear fellow posters,
My "quote" about N.B. Forrest may an example of ignorance--but not a sad example. It's a funny satiric example!
Because comparing President Lincoln and Grand Wizard Forrest about race, and finding the former wanting isn't ignorance, its deceptive.
Let me illustrate:
Compare these two quotes
"I support Jefferson Davis for the Presidency"
"If this crowd(of women) does not dispense in five minutes, the troops will open fire"
one was by Jefferson Davis and one by Benjamin "Beast" Butler. The first(drum roll please) was by Butler! And unbelievably the second by Jefferson Davis! I guess we know who is the true respector of Southern womanhood now! And which was a Jefferson Davis supporter.
See? I used actual quotes. Really, Butler really wanted Davis to be President, and Davis once threatened to shoot a crowd of women. Yet somehow many(actually everybody) will think that I haven't been, shall we say, completely truthful. The censorious may even award me an F in history.
The only book I've read about the former proprietor of "Slaves R Us" was a very admiring biography written in the 20s or 30s. This was about 25 years ago. The only thing I really retain was it had cool pen and ink illustrations. I've read about his wartime exploits of course, in works like Shelby Foote's.
I'm looking forward to digging into "A Battle From the Start" recommended by a couple of posters, because I am ignorant about Forrest's civilian career. He sounds like an interesting man. Not necessarily a nice man, or a consistent man but not a cardboard figure either. Rather, a remarkable man of his times, who made his choices and had his reasons.
I'm not certain it would matter Ole... Come on people lets drop the angst and keep on point.
Matthew bad teacher no apple... Rebprof bad prof no wine. Nbforrest bad youngun no whiskey for you. That's about all the sense of humor I have left after our lovely dust ups.
Lets please keep it polite and friendly and agree to disagree. If you have an issue w/ a post try PMing the author and asking for a clarification or hitting the ! in the corner and complaint will be noted and investigated by Ami or Mike.
Matthew a little earlier in the post RebProf & I both put forward some excellent works on Forrest. He was a fascinating man, self made and quite an increadible man. Over the years I've changed my own opinion of the man and agree w/ General Sherman in thinking that he was the most extroidinary general produced on either side. To my knowledge he had more black troops serving w/ him than any other CS command (around 40 if memory serves). He was not the enemy of the black man that he was later made out to be... He was ten times the man and General of many of his CS contemporaries. Wheeler didn't hold a candle to the man nor did Bragg.
__________________ Few take the trouble to understand or to view the American scene with perspective. And we Americans love to find ourselves guilty of something. However, it is never I who am guilty, but those other Americans, the past or present government or the other political party. Americans almost never find other countries guilty. It is always ourselves or our fancied influence in other countries. Louis L'amour
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Linear Mode
